Proposal talk:Surface Mining

Comments

• Works for me. MikeCollinson 19:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

• I am not a mining expert, but think there should be some more distinctions here. What the referenced wikipedia article for example does not talk about is the affect of ground water. If the mining is done below ground water level there is the option to have the pit fill with ground water and the excavation being done below water. I did not find any better example, but here is a link about some excavation devices http://www.ffa-fiebig.de/SGmLk.htm which show that. Shouldn't the rendering then being done different? --Dsp77 21:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

• • Why does this matter, in the context of OSM? Also, couldn't that be dealt with by using the ele key? If a disused mine fills with water, then it'll have to be remapped anyway. If not, then there's no difference, for the purposes of a map. --Naught101 05:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

• how to tag tailings? landuse=mine_tailings? landuse=tailings + resource=* ? (e.g. resource=dredge for harbour dredge spoils) --Hamish 2 September 2012

• • I'd agree with landuse=tailings + resource=*. makes a lot of sense. --Naught101 05:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

• landuse=quarry uses resource not mining_resource. For example: resource=sand, resource=aggregate, resource=gravel. It would be good if the two related land uses could agree on a common tagging convention for that. (currently taginfo shows that resource= has been used 12000 times, mining_resource= has been used 32 times) --Hamish 4 September 2012

Don't deprecate Quarry

A quarry is generally used for mining rock, clay, building materials. A surface mine is for mining minerals, ores etc. The difference is that the vast majority of what is removed from a mine is considered waste, while nearly all of what is quarried is used. Physically, they're quite similar, but semantically they're quite different, and there may be some use in retaining that distinction. --Naught101 07:23, 14 December 2012 (UTC)